GeForce GTS 160M
VS
Quadro FX 4700 X2

GeForce GTS 160M vs Quadro FX 4700 X2

NVIDIA

GeForce GTS 160M

2012Core: Up to 900 MHzBoost: 950 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

Quadro FX 4700 X2

2008Core: 602 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTS 160M is positioned at rank 275 and the Quadro FX 4700 X2 is on rank 401, so the GeForce GTS 160M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 160M

#265
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
639%
#267
580%
#268
578%
#272
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
526%
#273
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
522%
#275
GeForce GTS 160M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30
100%
#276
GeForce GTX 470M SLI
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $60
100%
#277
Radeon Vega 8 Ryzen 3 3200G
MSRP: $99|Avg: $70
99%
#279
Radeon RX Vega 9
MSRP: $99|Avg: $50
99%
#282
Iris Xe Graphics G7
MSRP: $200|Avg: $100
98%
#283
Radeon R9 M395
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
97%
#285
GeForce GT 755M SLI
MSRP: $200|Avg: $50
97%
#287
GeForce GTX 950A
MSRP: $159|Avg: $30
96%
#288
Radeon 540X
MSRP: $99|Avg: $40
94%
#289
GeForce 930MX
MSRP: $80|Avg: $25
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 4700 X2

#386
Tesla K20m
MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55
64230%
#401
Quadro FX 4700 X2
MSRP: $2999|Avg: $15
100%
#402
Quadro FX 3700
MSRP: $1599|Avg: $500
100%
#403
GRID M10-0B
MSRP: $4000|Avg: $1000
96%
#404
Quadro FX 4600
MSRP: $1999|Avg: $50
87%
#406
GRID K340
MSRP: $3299|Avg: $57
87%
#407
Quadro FX 5600
MSRP: $2999|Avg: $50
78%
#409
Quadro FX 3500
MSRP: $1599|Avg: $1599
74%
#410
Quadro FX 1400
MSRP: $799|Avg: $30
70%
#411
GRID K1
MSRP: $4140|Avg: $120
70%
#413
GRID P4-1Q
MSRP: $5890|Avg: $185
52%
#414
GRID RTX6000-2Q
MSRP: $6300|Avg: $1500
43%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTS 160M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

InsightGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
Performance
Leading raw performance (+0.4%)
Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%)
Longevity
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit

💎 Value Proposition

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro FX 4700 X2 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $30), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 99.1% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+99.1%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30)
More affordable ($15)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTS 160M and Quadro FX 4700 X2

NVIDIA

GeForce GTS 160M

The GeForce GTS 160M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 900 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 679 points.

NVIDIA

Quadro FX 4700 X2

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 676 points. Launch price was $1,799.

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTS 160M scores 679 and the Quadro FX 4700 X2 reaches 676 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTS 160M is built on Kepler while the Quadro FX 4700 X2 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GTS 160M) vs 192 (Quadro FX 4700 X2). Raw compute: 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 160M) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4700 X2).

FeatureGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
G3D Mark Score
679
676
Architecture
Kepler
Tesla 2.0
Process Node
28 nm
55 nm
Shading Units
384+100%
192
Compute (TFLOPS)
0.7296 TFLOPS+58%
0.4623 TFLOPS
ROPs
16
24+50%
TMUs
32
64+100%
L2 Cache
256 KB+33%
192 KB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
Upscaling Tech
FSR 1.0 (Software)
FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTS 160M comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 4700 X2 has 4 GB. The Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GTS 160M) vs 192 KB (Quadro FX 4700 X2) — the GeForce GTS 160M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
VRAM Capacity
1 GB
4 GB+300%
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
128-bit+100%
64-bit
L2 Cache
256 KB+33%
192 KB
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTS 160M draws 45W versus the Quadro FX 4700 X2's 150W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTS 160M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTS 160M) vs 350W (Quadro FX 4700 X2). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.

FeatureGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
TDP
45W-70%
150W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
Legacy
PCIe-powered
Slots
0
Temp (Load)
90°C
Perf/Watt
15.1+236%
4.5
💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 costs 50% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 22.6 (GeForce GTS 160M) vs 45.1 (Quadro FX 4700 X2) — the Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers 99.6% better value. The GeForce GTS 160M is the newer GPU (2012 vs 2008).

FeatureGeForce GTS 160MQuadro FX 4700 X2
MSRP
$2999
Avg Price (30d)
$30
$15-50%
Performance per Dollar
22.6
45.1+100%
Codename
GK107
GT200B
Release
March 22 2012
November 11 2008
Ranking
#828
#884